Popular Post katherine the great Posted October 9, 2018 Popular Post Posted October 9, 2018 Trying to create a timeline taken from a 2004 document by the grandmother and a 2002 appeal document. I might have to chop it up as I'm having a hard time getting it to post. I think it illustrates the emotional climate in which the allegations of ritual abuse were made. July, 1985:Marion Smith (grandmother of some of the plaintiffs) gave a lesson in Relief Society on the symptoms of child sexual abuse after which she was told by a ward sister that her five year old had tried to put something up his baby brother's rectum. She then referred the sister to Barbara Snow. This is Marion Smith's account. An earlier, 2002 appeal's court document states that the boy (4 years old in this account) was sent to Snow for using sexual language to other 4 year old boys. I would tend to believe Smith's version since she is the one who made the referral. The first session--nothing. The second session the boy said that he had been sexually assaulted by 2 eight year old boys from his neighborhood. Those boys were brought in to interview with Dr Snow. One of them claimed to have been molested along with several others by the father of the other 8 year old boy (Mr Bullock). Mr Bullock was also accused of molesting both his 8 year old son and his 12 year old daughter as well as various neighborhood children and babysitters who in turn molested younger children. In spite of the fact that three expert psychologists testified that Snow's methods were not standard and probably tainted the children's recollection of events, Bullock eventually went to prison and refused to plead down. He insists to this day that he is innocent. Some of the children testified that they felt pressured to make accusations and denied that they had been sexually abused in any way. This is the environment in which the ritual sexual abuse accusations from the same neighborhood came about. During the period of the Bullock inquest, Marion Smith was insisting that the Bishop send any suspected victims of babysitter abuse to counseling which he did. NONE of them admitted abuse. 5
katherine the great Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 January, 1986: Another babysitter was implicated in the Bullock case. Only this one had been a babysitter of two sets of Marion Smith's grandchildren (mother 1's children and her sister's children). This understandably alarmed her. She informed her daughters. Daughter Carstensen (mother 1) took her children at the behest of her husband to Barbara Snow who was told by all children that they had notbeen abused. Not believing them, the children were brought in for a second interview--this time for 2 hours (which can seem like an eternity to a young child). In that session, one of the children said that the babysitter puts crayons in her rectum (or vagina--its not clear) while she's napping. Smith claims that daughter 2's children corroborated this in a later interview. She states "After many interviews" the story grows to include the babysitter's two boyfriends. 4
katherine the great Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 The website is not letting me post more of the timeline. I will try to type it in later. Ugh. 2
Calm Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 Quote Not believing them, t She actually cleared them first until she heard one of their babysitters was suspected in the Bullock case. At that point she had the Mother1 bring the girls in again and after two hours, one finally said the crayon abuse . 3
katherine the great Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 Why do I keep getting an error message when I try to post the rest of my timeline? Anyone? Anyone? 👐
kllindley Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 8 minutes ago, katherine the great said: Why do I keep getting an error message when I try to post the rest of my timeline? Anyone? Anyone? 👐 Probably a sex related phrase. 1
Calm Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 46 minutes ago, katherine the great said: Why do I keep getting an error message when I try to post the rest of my timeline? Anyone? Anyone? 👐 Child connected with sex triggers the censor lots more. I do s-x when it follows child and that seems to take care of it mostly. S-x ring also looks like it is high on censor scale. 1
Abulafia Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 8 hours ago, cinepro said: Have you reviewed the notes and recordings from Snow's counseling sessions? Because if she didn't suggest those things, this could be notable as the one time she didn't. Abulafia, ultimately I'm afraid I have no confidence in your knowledge of the breadth and scope of what was happening in the 1980s, and how it happened. You are exhibiting the exact same thinking that led to so many innocent people being sent to jail. Yet Barbara Snow herself, if we want to make this solely about Barbara Snow and the Satanic Panic, witch hunt, mania and etc...(which would be convenient, then as soon as we hear the name associated with any claim we can dismiss *everything* as false) was responsible for at least two sound convictions that held up in a court of law. This Barbara Snow woman is so evil, so misdirected, that we must assume bad faith on her and anything she touches. Yet she never lost her licence, was put on probation years later (2007) for doing pro bono work for a relative and is still practicing today. The Attorney General's Office produced a sound report of problematic methods used by child counsellors, noted that ritual abuse did exist and they had evidence of that without the wider conspiracy theories of worldwide cabals set to rule the world. The truth is much more mundane. Religious communities in particular are more likely to use and adopt a religious narrative by twisting it to put the fear of God in children. I'll ask the same question. Show me what else I need to read that would directly impact on my view of this case. I will read it.
Abulafia Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 (edited) Calm, will get that timeline up when I get home. On the specific subject of whether the Miles involvement came out to Snow or to the Mother. Marion Smith's report is ambiguous on that point. She doesn't mention to whom the children confided, only that the Miles were eventually implicated by one of the children. Let me quote the specific section of Marion Smith's report that mentions this.. "As our grandchildren’s therapy continued, the circle of perpetrators widened to include **** and Brenda Miles" It is the witness statement in the suit by mother 1 who specifically notes it was her first who was notified by Jane Doe 1 with regard to the Miles, and then Jane Doe 1s own father. There is no contradiction there only more specific detail. On the two accomplices who were involved with Janice the babysitter in allegedly abusing the children, we know them only as *Mustardface and Tinklemouth*. The way Smith includes them in this section, is interesting but who they were related to can only be speculative. The girls picked them out, independently of each other from the high school year book. "Two of the grandchildren independently of each other picked out from the high school yearbook photos of the same two teenage boys who abused them. " The children's account was also corroborated by Marion's other daughter's children (their cousins). They too had been involved in *s*x* play with the babysitter and her friends. "Our other daughter’s little girls corroborated their cousins’ stories about things put up their b*******" Edited October 9, 2018 by Abulafia
Abulafia Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, katherine the great said: Trying to create a timeline taken from a 2004 document by the grandmother and a 2002 appeal document. I might have to chop it up as I'm having a hard time getting it to post. I think it illustrates the emotional climate in which the allegations of ritual abuse were made. July, 1985:Marion Smith (grandmother of some of the plaintiffs) gave a lesson in Relief Society on the symptoms of child sexual abuse after which she was told by a ward sister that her five year old had tried to put something up his baby brother's rectum. She then referred the sister to Barbara Snow. This is Marion Smith's account. An earlier, 2002 appeal's court document states that the boy (4 years old in this account) was sent to Snow for using sexual language to other 4 year old boys. I would tend to believe Smith's version since she is the one who made the referral. The first session--nothing. The second session the boy said that he had been sexually assaulted by 2 eight year old boys from his neighborhood. Those boys were brought in to interview with Dr Snow. One of them claimed to have been molested along with several others by the father of the other 8 year old boy (Mr Bullock). Mr Bullock was also accused of molesting both his 8 year old son and his 12 year old daughter as well as various neighborhood children and babysitters who in turn molested younger children. In spite of the fact that three expert psychologists testified that Snow's methods were not standard and probably tainted the children's recollection of events, Bullock eventually went to prison and refused to plead down. He insists to this day that he is innocent. Some of the children testified that they felt pressured to make accusations and denied that they had been sexually abused in any way. This is the environment in which the ritual sexual abuse accusations from the same neighborhood came about. During the period of the Bullock inquest, Marion Smith was insisting that the Bishop send any suspected victims of babysitter abuse to counseling which he did. NONE of them admitted abuse. Katherine, is there a link to this (2002) appeal on the Bullock case? If you found it online I probably could too. Will do a search. Edited October 9, 2018 by Abulafia
Abulafia Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 Okay found it. The whole piece is worth reading. Have skimmed.Will read properly and comment. The conclusions are interesting. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/297/1036/505568/ 1
Abulafia Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 8 hours ago, katherine the great said: So what? He was treating them for sexual abuse. They believed they were sexually abused. They well may have been sexually abused. I don't see anything even slightly reliable that shows that they were sexually abused by the Miles. Read point 3 of Paul Whiteheads statement.
Calm Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 1 hour ago, Abulafia said: Read point 3 of Paul Whiteheads statement. But he says nothing about how he came to that conclusion unfortunately 3
Popular Post katherine the great Posted October 9, 2018 Popular Post Posted October 9, 2018 7 hours ago, Abulafia said: Read point 3 of Paul Whiteheads statement. I read it. It doesn't mean anything except that this is what his patient told him and others. This is the same psychiatrist who testified in the Brian Mitchell case (Elizabeth Smart's kidnapper). He stated in his testimony that Brian Mitchell had "discussed" having a baby with Elizabeth Smart. Elizabeth was outraged because she had no such conversation with Mitchell and yet Whitehead stated it in court. He stated it because it is what Brian Mitchell told him. That doesn't make it a fact. 6
smac97 Posted October 9, 2018 Author Posted October 9, 2018 7 hours ago, Abulafia said: Read point 3 of Paul Whiteheads statement. I invite you to give this matter some reconsideration. What Whitehead says here is conclusory. He was not a percipient witness to what is claimed to have happened. Do you acknowledge that? Whitehead was relating what he had been told. That's all. Do you acknowledge that? Thanks, -Smac 3
katherine the great Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 8 hours ago, Abulafia said: On the two accomplices who were involved with Janice the babysitter in allegedly abusing the children, we know them only as *Mustardface and Tinklemouth*. The way Smith includes them in this section, is interesting but who they were related to can only be speculative. The girls picked them out, independently of each other from the high school year book. "Two of the grandchildren independently of each other picked out from the high school yearbook photos of the same two teenage boys who abused them. " The children's account was also corroborated by Marion's other daughter's children (their cousins). They too had been involved in *s*x* play with the babysitter and her friends. "Our other daughter’s little girls corroborated their cousins’ stories about things put up their b*******" I thought that was intriguing as well. But its not supported by the current suit. There they are referred to as "unknown" males. So its possible that they didn't actually identify them without help. 2
katherine the great Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 9 hours ago, Abulafia said: Yet Barbara Snow herself, if we want to make this solely about Barbara Snow and the Satanic Panic, witch hunt, mania and etc...(which would be convenient, then as soon as we hear the name associated with any claim we can dismiss *everything* as false) was responsible for at least two sound convictions that held up in a court of law. Other than Bullock (who had several alleged victims admit it never happened), who is the other one?
Tacenda Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 https://www.bsnowtherapy.com/AboutMe.en.html Here is Dr. Snow's website, I wonder if anyone would like to reach out and ask some questions. I know I wouldn't be able to since I haven't been studying the case as well as you all have. But if the Miles are innocent, it's a shame.
Abulafia Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 39 minutes ago, smac97 said: I invite you to give this matter some reconsideration. What Whitehead says here is conclusory. He was not a percipient witness to what is claimed to have happened. Do you acknowledge that? Whitehead was relating what he had been told. That's all. Do you acknowledge that? Thanks, -Smac Yes. Absolutely. He believes the children.
Abulafia Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 27 minutes ago, katherine the great said: Other than Bullock (who had several alleged victims admit it never happened), who is the other one? Allen Hadfield, as I understand it.
Danzo Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 19 minutes ago, Abulafia said: Yes. Absolutely. He believes the children. Its not evidence of anything, anymore than you believing them is evidence of anything. 1
webbles Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 27 minutes ago, Abulafia said: Allen Hadfield, as I understand it. I found a Utah Supreme Court case where Alan Hadfield argued for a retrial. The Supreme Court granted the retrial. You can see the opinion at https://law.justia.com/cases/utah/supreme-court/1990/880234.html. Interesting quote: Quote The claimed new evidence includes (1) a doctoral thesis in which Barbara Snow discussed the use of authority and punishment to modify patient behavior, (2) testimony that she used this technique to modify the responses of her child patients to questions about s-xual abuse, (3) testimony from law enforcement personnel that false information deliberately "fed" by them to Barbara Snow in their investigatory work promptly appeared in the statements of children she interviewed, and (4) a highly suspicious correlation between the factual patterns revealed in at least four child s-x abuse investigations in which Barbara Snow was involved. 3
cinepro Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 (edited) 10 hours ago, Abulafia said: This Barbara Snow woman is so evil, so misdirected, that we must assume bad faith on her and anything she touches. Yet she never lost her licence, was put on probation years later (2007) for doing pro bono work for a relative and is still practicing today. Again, you misunderstand. I don't think any of us are accusing Snow of being intentionally "evil", nor are we assuming "bad faith." On the contrary, I suspect she was 100% convinced that she was doing good, and saving children from systematic and pervasive abuse. I wouldn't be surprised if she still believed that the children were always being truthful with her. I don't think she was out to get anyone, or intentionally framing innocent people. I think she actually thought (and perhaps still thinks) that there were these networks of molestation going on in the suburbs, and that she had special talents and skills in finding out about them. Certainly, such a theory was only being reinforced by the other cases being reported around the country. Edited October 9, 2018 by cinepro 1
Abulafia Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 35 minutes ago, Danzo said: Its not evidence of anything, anymore than you believing them is evidence of anything. What you and I think is irrelevant. It's the weighting given to his expert testimony that will or won't count in a court of law. (As I understand it).
Abulafia Posted October 9, 2018 Posted October 9, 2018 Just now, cinepro said: Again, you misunderstand. I don't think any of us are accusing Snow of being intentionally "evil", nor are we assuming "bad faith." On the contrary, I suspect she was 100% convinced that she was doing good, and saving children from systematic and pervasive abuse. I wouldn't be surprised if she still believed that the children were always being truthful with her. I don't think she was out to get anyone, or intentionally framing innocent people. I think she actually thought (and perhaps still thinks) that there were these networks of molestation going on in the suburbs, and that she had special talents and skills in finding out about them. Certainly, such a theory was only being reinforced by the other cases being reported around the country. Agreed. We then have to explain the nature of these children's memories in this case.
Recommended Posts